Emerging security architecture in South Asia - Part 3

by Prof. Gamini Keerawella

(Continued from March 7)

The emergence of US-led international alliance against terrorism following the September 11th attack on America and the subsequent war against terrorism in Afghanistan, code-named Operation Enduring Freedom, generated an immediate impact on the security atmosphere in South Asia. It was so not simply because Operation Enduring Freedom was launched in the close vicinity of South Asia but mainly because terrorism remained a pressing security concern in the region for years. Given the fact that internal military conflicts in the weak states that provide breeding ground for terrorism and intra-state insurgencies involving terrorist groups constitute main element of insecurity, mainly in the Third World, the international coalition against terrorism really introduced a new feature in the post-Cold War international security system.

The use of violence to strike fear in others is perhaps the oldest tool in politics. Violence is indeed a property of force. It is in-built, covertly or overtly, in political power. Hence, the monopoly over the legitimate use of organized violence, according to Max Weber, constitutes a key future of the state. Therefore, anti-state violence cannot be isolated from state violence. In this context, how to define the term terrorism remains a vexed issue. The terrorism is different from gang warfare and other criminal enterprises carried out by warlords. In avoiding pedantic debate on terminology, this study broadly goes with the definition by Thomas J Badey and international terrorism is defined as the 'repeated use of political motivated violence with coercive intent, by non-state actors, that affects more than one state', even if this definition also suffers from certain defects.

After the September 11th incident, countering the transnational terrorism that operates at the global scale by utilizing the vistas opened up by the intense pace of globalization received the highest priority and it is now being recognized as the major security threat, especially by the world powers. This international concern is reflected in the adoption of the UN Security Council Resolution 1373. The new international concern against terrorism and the war against terrorism opened up new challenges as well as opportunities in relation to the security of South Asian countries individually and collectively.

However, the phenomenon of terrorism is by no means new to South Asia. Long before the September 11th terrorism attack, South Asia states have been grappling with the challenge of terrorism. Each South Asia state has its own dose of experience. In year 2000, in the context of general upsurge of multinational terrorism, Asia accounts for 75 percent of all terrorism related casualties worldwide. As Brahma Chellaney observed, "(M)uch of Asia's terrorist violence is concentrated in its southern belt, which in the past decade emerged as the international hub of terrorism". This southern Asian belt encompasses Sri Lanka, India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Myanmar, and Tibet. The terrorist groups operating in these countries maintain international linkages and networks beyond regional parameters. In this background, the South Asian states consider the US-led international coalition and the war against international terrorism a very important development.

The terrorism in South Asia has diverse origins and it takes different forms. In the first phase, the anti-establishment violence carried out by class-based political movement dominated the sphere of terrorism. However, with the rise of ethno-political mobilisations, violence associated with identity-based politics dominated the sphere. The ethnic conflicts should not necessarily be identified with terrorism. The ethnic conflict is only a manifestation of a deep-rooted structural political crisis faced by the state where it fails to establish its legitimacy vis-a-vis different ethno-national groups in a multi-ethnic society. However, chronic failure on the part of the state to restructure its system of governance and distribution of power and perpetuation of the conflict provide a basis and a breeding ground for terrorism. At the same time, in an era of ethnic resurgence, some ethno-political entrepreneurs, "self-aggrandizing politicians seeking to build constituencies for attaining political power", emerge and invest in and exploit ethnicity to ensure themselves a place in the political sun. Once ethnic forces are in motion, it is not possible for ethno-political entrepreneurs to control them.

Ultimately they themselves become the victims of the fire that they have ignited.

The ethno-political landscape of South Asia is abundant with militant groups, active and dormant, that resort to terrorism to achieve their declared aims. The broad objective of these groups is to achieve separate statehood for their own people in the identified historical homeland in terms of ethnic identity. The method and strategy they adopt may vary from peaceful resistance to violent armed struggle depending on the political context and response of the state. Quite a few militant groups that practice terrorism as a political weapon enjoy world wide reach. The LTTE in Sri Lanka comes first in South Asia in terms of its ferocity and organizational network. These groups are inter-linked, regionally and internationally. For arms procurement they cultivate international networks. According to Small Arms Survey of the Geneva based Institute of International Studies, "(S)ince the end of the Cold War, the LTTE has capitalized upon weapons that have become available on illegal arms market generally.... However, traditional networks in Cyprus, Hong Kong, Lebanon and Singapore continue to be used. In addition, dealers in Bulgaria, Kazakhstan, Slovakia, and the Ukraine offer weapons formerly under the control of the Warsaw Pact security sectors where corrupt and poorly-paid bureaucrats, sometimes in league with organized crime syndicates, offer weapons to any individual or organization willing to the required price. There are also allegations that the LTTE has links with organized crime groups in Bulgaria, Lithuania, and the Russian Federation. Erstwhile war zones, such as Afghanistan, Cambodia, Mozambique, and the former Yugoslavia, provide another source".

It is not possible to argue, as Brahma does in International Security, that "the spread of militancy and terrorism in southern Asia is linked to the Afghan war of the 1980s and the U.S. and Saudi funneling of arms to the anti-Soviet guerillas through Pakistan's Inter-Service Intelligence (ISI) agency" . In South Asia, the terrorism has a long history and almost all the countries have been burning for years. Hence, the spread of terrorism cannot simply be attributed to the anti-Soviet war in Afghanistan. However, it contributed heavily to further militarize Pakistani civil society. The flourishing open and not so open armed market in the Pakistan-Afghanistan border area provided convenient supply source of arms to many terrorist groups in South Asia.

India which has been suffering from terrorism for years readily extended its support soon after the United States declared a war on terrorism. India considered the international coalition against terrorism positive development. In extending its assistance to the US war effort, it offered the use of Indian military bases, airfields and intelligence to American forces in connection with the war on terrorism. This involvement did not create serious domestic repercussions in India. The situation in Pakistan was different. In contrast, Pakistan faced with a real dilemma with the international coalition against terrorism and the declaration of war against terrorism in Afghanistan. In the light of the fact the Islamization policy had allowed earlier for the Islam fundamentalists to make deep inroads into the state structures and intellectual structures, taking steps against militant groups is considered a very difficult and hazardous move. With all these risks Pakistan came forward to assist the United States in its 'war against terrorism in Afghanistan by offering the access to its air space, military bases other help with the identification of targets. It also moved firmly against militants in Pakistan itself and its security forces apprehended some 500 suspected al-Qaeda operatives between 2001 and 2003 including the arrest of Khaled Sheikh Mohammed.

After the two attempts on his life, Musharraff came against Islamist extremism vigorously re-banned the re-named Islamic Extremist groups: the Khudan-ul-Islam (formerly JeM) and Jamaat-ul-Dawa (formerly LeT). In June 2004, Pakistan military carried out a five-day armed assault on Al-Qaeda hideouts in South Waziriatan near the Afghan border killing 55 militants. At the same time, Pakistan was able to take into custody Daud Badini, leader of the Lashkar-e-Qaida, the Al-Qaeda linked militant group that carried out sectarian attacks against minority Shiite Muslims in southwestern Pakistan. It is clear that Pakistan is now on the road of no return.

The changed international environment after the September 11th and the war against terrorism is having a profound impact on the security situation in South Asia, a region that has been suffering from terrorism severely. Firstly, the international outrage and the opinion against terrorism created considerable constraints on the anti-government militant outfits to release unhindered terrorist activities as in the case before. Many militant organizations active in South Asia maintain their international headquarters in the developed world in the West; the fund raising activities and other networks operate from these centers. These groups tap the long-distance nationalism of the expatriate communities that are well settled in the greener pastures in the developed West as a main funding source to finance the modern weapons systems from international arms black market. In the changed situation, these networks suffered severely. This situation forced many militant outfits in the region to change their modus operandi, at least as a tactical move, and explore the possibility of a negotiated settlement to their declared problems and grievances.

Secondly, the September 11th attack highlighted the need for a collective and coordinated action on the part of the international community to deal with the challenge of terrorism in an era of globalization.

Prior to the September 11th, it was mainly the Third World countries that bore the brunt of international terrorism. The US military, diplomatic and civil personnel had become victims to terrorism but geographical location still remained Third World. The center of gravity in terrorist activities and targets has now moved to the political and financial centers the West, though its roots are located in the Third World. This geographical shift of the center of gravity of terrorism made the pillars of world power and dominance realize the true gravity of the problem. The countering of international terrorism became the number one priority for these powers. In this context it is no longer possible for the South Asian states to play with terrorism and use it as a surrogate to undermine the security and stability of the strained neighbour.

In the light of multiple linkages of terrorist outfits at the regional and multi-national levels, a common regional approach to supplement the international effort to counter terrorism has become a foremost necessity.

Thirdly, the new international concern on terrorism prompted to address the deep-rooted social and political problems that beget terrorism - both process and personnel.

After the initial dust of the September 11th attack settled, a need for a more comprehensive approach that goes beyond the initial military response to counter terrorism received the attention of the policy planners. In the discourse on how to counter the terrorism effectively, the attention has been made to address the roots of terrorism. Terrorism cannot simply be attributed to the paranoia of few dedicated megalomaniacs. Terrorism has diverse roots and ethno-political grievances provide the required social conditions for the terrorist outfits to emerge and progress.

The many terrorist outfits in South Asia get their credentials from unsettled ethnic crises. In the background of entrenched ethnic plurality, many South Asian countries are in the state of low degree of national integration. The accommodation of multi-ethnicity in political system and the broadening the basis of the democratic order of governance to include many political and ethnic stakeholders in the decision-making process acquired renewed significance as a part of a comprehensive approach to counter terrorism.

Fourthly, as a result of these new developments, the internal conflicts in the countries of South Asia have now increasingly become a matter of international concern. The earlier division between internal and international conflicts has disappeared and the implications of the perpetuation of domestic conflicts and implosion of states on the broader international security compelled international community to intervene in conflict management endeavours in internal crisis in South Asia. Nevertheless, the states in South Asia are generally averse to such external intervention in their internal affairs. The only country that can withhold such pressure may be India. Many protracted internal conflicts are linked with ethno-political mobilizations and identity politics. The international concern over the internal ethno-political conflicts is translated in the form of pressure on the both state and non-state party to the conflict to reject the use of force as means of conflict resolution and insist to come to political settlement with in the territorial integrity of the present states in South Asia.

This international concern manifests in three forms. The major powers and other international actors continuously monitor the developments in internal conflicts and regularly issue statements and communiques detailing their concerns and positions. In addition, some others come forward to play a role of facilitator/mediator in the internal ethno-political conflicts. the facilitator role of Norwegians in the Sri Lankan conflict can be cited as an example.

Those who do not play the direct role as facilitators show their interest by hosting international conferences in the quest of resolving internal conflicts. Japan's role in hosting the Tokyo aid confab for Sri Lanka, the aid package and peace conditionality must be viewed in this context.

(To be continued)